But then, in Friday’s Fry’s insert in the Houston Chronicle, I spotted a deal that, once I investigated , was too good to pass up. Fry’s advertised a combo that paired an Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 processor with a Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P motherboard for $249.

Generally, Intel’s Core 2 Quads outperform the AMD Phenoms I was considering, and this combo makes the Q8200 less expensive, too.

I also picked up some Corsair 800-MHz DDR2 memory for $50, with a $25 rebate. That makes the total cost of my upgrade around $275, before tax, which is well under my planned limit.

Unfortunately, I had to do this transaction two times, in two different Fry’s stores.

I initially went to the Fry’s at Interstate 45 North and West Road. They had only one Q8200 chip left, and it had been opened. After looking at it and realizing it had actually been installed in a system, I told the clerk that I wanted to cancel the whole transaction – only she’d already rung it up. She had to go through Fry’s notoriously lengthy return procedure, rather than simply void the sale.

I drove south to the Fry’s on U.S. 59 at Belfort in Stafford and went through the process again. This time, they had 21 of the CPUs – and this time I bought one that hadn’t been opened.

If I get a clear block of time this weekend, I’ll rebuild my PC. Watch TechBlog and my Twitter feed for updates.

Update: When I opened my PC’s case to begin the process, I discovered that I didn’t have the power supply I thought I had. For some reason, I remembered installing a 550-watt unit, but it’s actually a 430-watt PSU. The Gigabyte motherboard recommends at least a 500-watt PSU.

I assembled all the components, removed the old motherboard, and put the new one into the case. I installed the new power supply, inserted the video card and plugged all the various cables into place. I fired it up and . . .

Everything seems to come on. All the lights and all the fans do what they should . . . except the fan on the processor. It moves slightly, then stops. I also don’t get a video signal from the ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics card, which worked fine in my previous setup.

I’ve been doing some troubleshooting – reinserting the memory and video card, checking for poorly connected cables, etc. – and it’s come down to the point where I probably need to see about re-seating the processor. If that doesn’t work, I may have a faulty CPU.

Update 3.0: Master Guru suggested I needed to get some power into an 8-pin connector on the motherboard. Dr. Apps on Twitter seconded that motion. The Gigabyte manual indicates it’s needed for a 130-watt Core 2 Extreme processor, but that’s not what I have. Still, that connector provides juice to the processor.

The power supply I have doesn’t come with an 8-pin plug, but it does have two 4-pin plugs, and the Gigabyte manual says those are acceptable. I tried plugging them in, but no luck.

I also tried re-seating the processor, as well as swapping out the video card. Still no luck.

At this point, I’m going on the theory that the CPU is faulty, and I suspect I’ll be making yet another Fry’s run this week to exchange it.

Update 3.9.2009: Tonight I exhausted my troubleshooting options, and none of them worked.

Here’s what I tried, based on suggestions left as comments in this blog and via Twitter:

• Swapped out the RAM with a known-good stick.

• Tried a different power supply.

• Unplugged everything except the basics, so the graphics card, RAM and the power supply were the only things plugged into the motherboard.

• Removed the motherboard from the case and powered it up from there, in case the issue was a short. It wasn’t.

I spoke with techs from Gigabyte and Intel, who also suggested similar troubleshooting steps. The best test, though, is to substitute either the motherboard or the CPU. In the next day or so, I should have access to another processor and will install that. If it works, then the original processor was fault. If it doesn’t, a bad motherboard is the culprit.

While this has been frustrating, I’ve learned a lot, mainly thanks to the readers of this blog and my Twitter followers. Also, giant props to Adrian Kingsley-Hughes and Claus Valca – both have provided tons of good information.

When this is done, I plan to write an intensely detailed post about troubleshooting a homebrew PC.

Theoretically, Gigabyte recommend a 500W+ PSU, but in practice unless you are doing extreme OC’ing, you should be fine. I’ve run that board and a Q6600 CPU on a 350W PSU before (and that was with a very thirsty GPU).

I have to say Dwight, after reading about your love for macs for the last couple of years, this whole building another PC thing is giving you some major street cred back! I get most of my computer parts from Newegg.com or Amazon, but Fry’s comes in handy for alot of things that I’d rather see up close first.

The CPU fan shuts down with the processor. The rest of the items will remain powered.

Have you:

A) Checked the BIOS version on the motherboard (as shipped) and installed the latest one? Can you enter the BIOS and see it on your screen? I would do that first. The files needed and the instructions are on the Gigabyte website under CPU support list for your mobo…

B) Turn machine off, unplug, remove battery for a minute or so, replace and try again (after BIOS version confirmation).

C) Have you set the BIOS for your PEG device and for your memory speed? Load optimized defaults.

I can’t get far enough to check the BIOS; as I said, no video. But the board is rated to be able to handle this processor out of the box, so I don’t think the BIOS is the issue.

I have not pulled the battery yet; may give that a try.

The docs on page 23 indicate the plug is needed for a Core 2 Extreme, at 130 watts. This is 95-watt Core 2 Quad. But, I’ve had some other folks on Twitter suggest this may be the issue, so I will investigate.

I have seen the condition where the system seems to be on yet cannot get to BIOS screen twice.

The first was because a faulty (or incompatible) device was attached. Remove one at a time to check.

The second was upon a system rebuild. The chassis’ Front Panel connector and the motherboard’s Front Panel header did not match. Fortunately in that case, the connector was made of several 2 pin connectors. I referred to both PSU and mobo manuals to match them up. The reason I bring this up is that the mobo will need these connected properly to power up and boot.

I would:

Turn off PSU. Unplug. Turn switch back on then off to dump the caps. Remove then replace the battery or use the CMOS reset header. Grab a pair of needle nose pliers and a 2 pin jumper. Power up PSU. Jump the power on and then the reset pins momentarily. See if the PSU fan keeps running. One of these sets of two pins on the Front Panel header when momentarily jumpered (mimicking the switches on the chassis) should power the LED on the board. One will boot. If testing on a bench, make sure a load is connected to the board, such as a hard drive you know works (see PSU manual).

I also bench test a new mobo combo before I install it. It does not have to be in the case to test. Just make sure the board is isolated – I would mount (4) long standoffs in corners and set onto a shock proof pad. Bring the PSU/Case near and plug in…use method above to boot. Once the system runs for a while, power off and install. Works for me…in fact I just had a whole system on my table running for a week that way to test. Please do not do this if you’re not going to use extreme care as electricity hurts.

As Dwight said in his Chron column today, it’s usually not that economical to build one from scratch compared to buying a ready-made machine. IMHO, it only makes since if you can do at least 1 of 2 things:

1. Re-use some of your components (as Dwight has said and is doing), but then your build might be a bit slower in some respects than a pre-built (i.e. older and slower HDD, DVD burner, etc);

2. Already have a valid copy of Windows not tied to a particular machine (unlike the disks that come with a pre-built).

If you can do one of these, then you might, repeat might, break even in terms of cost. Having to buy Windows can easily push you across the break-even point. If you can do both 1&2, then you can come out ahead of the game. As Dwight has also pointed out, the main advantage in the home-built arena is the control you have in getting the exact components you want/need for your usage. The downside, as you can see from the updates, is that things can get frustrating quickly if there are problems with the components and you are the one who has to troubleshoot and fix it.

I took the liberty of visiting both the Gigabyte site and Fry’s Electronics. Based on the description of the rebate amount and the brand it appears you purchased 4gb Twin2x4096-6400 C5G. Since this motherboard supports up to DDR 1300 I was a bit surprized that you went with only an 800mhz ram but I imagined it had something to do with your budget. According to Gigabytes site there is only one Corsair 800mhz memory module listed for this particular Motherboard. The part number does not match the one above. The Corsair memory module listed is part number CMX1024-6400C4

Will any 800mhz ram work? The ram out of your working system you used to test or the ram you purchased? I’m unsure, but since I build systems I typically like to use what the MB manufacturer recomends, less frustrations and trips to the store.

I am guessing that your other system is still handy.. you can try your new psu and power it up or you can take your old psu and fire up the new MB long enogh for testing purposes.

It can be a very frustrating process when things don’t go as easily as expected but that’s part of the pleasure of building them.(the problem solving part)at least for me it has been.

Dwight says he had a 3.4Ghz Pentium 4 chip. Now he has a 2.33Ghz Quad Core chip. Considering most software won’t even begin to take advantage of dual-cores much less quad-cores, didn’t he just downgrade his processing power?

Using the manufacturer’s recommendations is generally a wise decision, but we also find on the same pages that Gigabyte links us to for each motherboard the following disclaimer:

“Memory modules listed below are for reference only. Due to massive memory models on the market, we can only verify some of them”

Here is what I do:

I read the manufacturer’s specifications. Then I just make sure the alternate manufacturer’s module’s specifications are identical. It is that simple. Read and compare the specifications, and not just the ads.

These are 1333 MHz modules tested in high end systems @1600 MHz…Since the chosen motherboard supports 1600 MHz FSB , I would set up a profile in the BIOS for OC’ing the system, in this case the Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P with the Intel Q8200…

(make sure you grab that CPU fan I mentioned to stay within the Intel Thermal Specifications: (y = 0.28x + 44.8) for the Q8000 series, then enjoy one of the fastest Intel Quad Core systems out there) Oh, BTW, set the DDR Voltage @ 2.1 V. I would also force the PCI bus to 100 and set the CPU V to stock. Disable C1E and use High Performance Power Setting in Vista…This is how I am running a 2.0 Ghz Pentium Dual Core @ 2.66 GhZ and a 1066 FSB @ 34C idle – the performance is amazing.

They will and do, of course, run rock solid at stock speeds and voltages and also when OC’d when done right..

Note: The math above also goes a long way towards understanding how to specify the right parts for an upgrade.

@ Ira – I may be incorrect here, but my enterprise/home performance observations and experience is as follows:

Stated simply as possible, a properly configured Vista/XP/W7 system should be able to take advantage of all CPU system cores available, then automatically manage (almost) any application across the multi-cores for the best performance possible. While some applications could be programmed to run on a specific processor core(s), it is my experience that they are not. And the OS evenly spreads the application service/thread loads across all the CPU’s available.

An advanced user can easily force an application onto only one particular core, or several cores. But we rarely do that… If a OS is not set up correctly, it might only recognize a single core, when mulitple cores are available (it’s an incorrect NTOSKNRL and HAL.DLL thing).

Generally, for most all users/systems, the more cores the better–regardless of application design and programming–on overall performance.

Where I have traditionally heard performance/application issues is in the realm of x32 bit vs x64 bit OS versions. It has been the case that while x64 bit Windows OS versions were available, there was a lack of software written to take advantage of the differences in processing under the x64 bit OS environment.

As more and more applications, particularly high-system demanding ones (Photoshop, video editing, 3-D graphics rendering, etc…) are rewritten now into true x64 bit supported code architecture, and run under a x64 OS system, then true performance improvements are seen and obtained, and with the multi-core systems, all the more so.

Now that this area of computing is becoming more common-place I’m hearing more non-geeks and gamers (pro-sumers if you will) attempting to install and run x64 bit versions of Vista in particular for performance reasons.

I’m sure the hardware pros here at TechBlog can spin this out in more detail if they wish, or correct any oversimplifications I have made.

@ Master Guru — Great breakdown on the memory calculations! You put some work in that and I’m going to have to bookmark that comment!

Thanks for the explanation. That covers the question about core usage, but what about the overall speed of the processor? He went from 3.4GHz chip to (basically) 4 2.33GHz chips running in parallel, right? Because they task different processes out, does that make the 1+ GHz drop in processor speed negligible?

There’s a lot more to processor and system performance than clock speed. Claus gave you an excellent rundown on multi-core scenarios, but other factors are in play. General chip architecture plays a role, as does the bandwidth and speed of the data paths on the motherboard, along with the capabilities of the GPU. In general, the system I’m building is going to be a lot snappier than the single-core, 3.4 GHz processor-based system I’m replacing. I’m not at all worried about the reduction in clock speed.